Timberwolf Progress Update

[Piru]

You have speedup OWB, maybe it is faster now as netsurf.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Can somebody who have MOS OWB and a Peg with 1 GHZ CPU tell what render time this page need ?

What you're doing has nothing to do with benchmarking. What you're mostly measuring is the network latencies (DNS and connect, data transmission) for specific user at the specific moment in time. Also the server load the specific point in time can affect the result. To get any meaningful results the test must be of loading a page offline, with cache fully cleared before each test. But of course you know all this as you have been told numerous times already.

If you want to benchmark browsers (or specific subsystems of them in most cases), see:
http://clients.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/
http://www.webkit.org/perf/sunspider/sunspider.html
http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/data/benchmarks/v6/run.html
http://dromaeo.com/
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/csstest.html

Oh wait! Netsurf can't run most of those test because it doesn't do javascript...

[Piru]

The results of classic, SAM and pegasus are all from same user done on same day and simular time.so inet access you can compare good.

You think the internet connection is working constantly all the time? Are you that uninformed? Latencies can vary from second to second due to multitude of reasons, some client and some server side. Benchmarking page load on live inet connection can never produce any reasonable benchmark results, even if you run the tests minutes apart.

that inet access is not important in time, you can also see because Pegasos  G4 1 GHZ is 2.3* faster as SAM 667 MHZ with netsurf

this fit the blender benchmark, here Peg is too around 2* faster.And because the G4 have same much better performance /MHZ in the netsurf test and blender test, can be 99% sure inet is no speedbrake.

Correlation does not imply causation

This is just one of the fallacies you seem to be blind to.

@Piru

Is there a benchmark here that test CSS layout speed ?

Yes.

[Piru]

I tell the users that they should do every test several times and only if the test result differ not more than 1-2 sec they should use it.

That doesn't help. The inet connection can be slow for long period of times. Or not. It's just impossible to tell. The inet connection is the largest random variable and thus is must be eliminated to get any sensible data.

From rest of you reply I see that you still are unable to understand the problem. I give up. But if you bring your flawed benchmarks up again I will keep on pointing out that they're completely pointless.

what test it is ?

The one that says "csstest" perhaps?

[Piru]

as i have written before, i tell the users to test it offline but nobody do.

How about if you'd provide the test kit with instructions how to use it? If you don't, everyone will do random thing x and you will get totally random results. I know I know, you're 99% sure everyone is doing it correctly...

The only way to get reliable results would be to run the tests on the same system, with offline content. Anything else is just pointless random guessing about the testing environment for any specific result. Drawing any kind of conclusions from such a random result set is just idiotic.

[Piru]

as i told, its no problem, if the MOS or OS4 developers think the test is wrong, they can post time values offline

Sure. Except that each test would be different and thus the values could not be compared against each other.

How hard is it to understand this?

[Piru]

Because CSS layout is the main speed problem it doesnt matter if the text is diffrent a little longer or have other images.

try it out if you dont believe.

save the page today to harddrive and save it tomorrow to harddrive or on some other days

You do understand that

• the actual content on the pages changes daily if not every minute
• if everyone is to run the test by themselves they might save the page in a different way

There is just no way this can work out. The test kit must be static or the whole exercise is just totally pointless.

I officially give up on you. I'll look into the ignore feature here on amiga.org. There, you're now ignored. Feel free to dwell in your ignorance.

[Piru]

you morphOS fans

Generalizing like that does wonders in building ever wider disparity.

pick out flaws and issues

As for not voicing your concerns even if you feel like something is wrong: I think it is far worse to keep silent than to say something. You may not like what you hear, but often you need to hear it. Sometimes it feels like certain projects are considered so holy that even a whiff of questioning will result in Spanish Inquisition.

notice how many OS4 fans jump on and bashed the project or tried to derail the thread?

As for Odyssey, I hardly can see any point in criticising it. On the other hand Timberwolf is far more susceptible for criticism (for example due to the fact that the target seems to be progressing far faster than the porting process, and the fact that no proper non-alpha release have been made). Undoubtedly some of the criticism is unwarranted, but certainly not all. Once usable Timberwolf has been released there's much less room for criticism.

[Piru]

yup always the same old usual suspects but it's tolerated & actually expected here at this site unfortunately, so why are you surprised:confused:

There are several individuals who I'd rather see stfu permanently. Yet, for some reason I don't see it a failing of this site (well most of the time at least).

If this freedom feels overwhelming there are alternatives which are far more restrictive of what you can say or criticise...

[Piru]

How many posts here are about "Timberwolf Progress Update"?

Not many. I wonder why that is? However there has been a ton of discussion related to Timberwolf, other browsers and circumstances related to the progress (or lack of) the Timberwolf porting. Also some quite off topic discussion as well, but in all IMHO it hasn't gone completely off topic.

Quite many are personal insults against Frieden brothers/Hyperion

File a abuse report and let the moderators moderate.